Money, Reputation or both?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Joe,

No shame at all.  The world needs more public courses. It probably needs more courses close to housing, rather than a drive out in the country (eco friendly and gas prices, etc)

The type of course it probably needs least is top end, hard to get to, yet utterly spectacular golf courses that the top gca's compete for.

As I typed a few weeks ago in my thread about my mentor Ken Killian - He told me you do more for the world of golf by remodeling one green and making it good at a modest course that can't afford more than you do building a TPC course.  And, he said that there are no bad design projects until you design them badly.  

JC,

I stilll think what your are mixing up is design you don't particularly like with design goals that don't let the gca build the next great one.  Although, as the WW shows, there is no reason you can't design two equal, but vastly differently styled courses across the street from each other and make them both good.  

Mike Young,

No, I haven't sewn up any entire countries yet.  That is reminiscent of JN signing agreements early on to only do one course in Texas, or at least only one per metro area.  He got out of that one early on, realizing it was too limiting.  I really have about 0.00000001% of the marketing stroke of JN and a few others.

[Mike Nuzzo]

As I typed a few weeks ago in my thread about my mentor Ken Killian - He told me you do more for the world of golf by remodeling one green and making it good at a modest course that can't afford more than you do building a TPC course.  And, he said that there are no bad design projects until you design them badly.  

It seems like the course(s) that is (are) being described has (have) no good greens.

[Jud_T]

Jeff,

I think Ken's comment that there are no bad design projects until you design them badly is right on target.  All we can ask is for each GCA to make the best possible course given the property, budget, target market etc...But what do you do when the client is very difficult, meddlesome, etc.?  Do you simply make the best of it regardless of how it will turn out? Do you walk away?

[JC Jones]

Jeff,

I think Ken's comment that there are no bad design projects until you design them badly is right on target.  All we can ask is for each GCA to make the best possible course given the property, budget, target market etc...But what do you do when the client is very difficult, meddlesome, etc.?  Do you simply make the best of it regardless of how it will turn out? Do you walk away?

That is precisely the question I am asking.  If you dont think you can design a course worthy of your name given the constraints (owner personality, budget, property, etc.), do you take the project anyways for the $$ or do you walk away?

[Lester George]

Jeff,

This is getting circular.  I'll be going now.  Thanks for your efforts is in explaining.

Lester

[Mike Nuzzo]

Given any opportunity I think an architect should make 18 good holes.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jud and JC,

Generally, you can walk away early in the sales process when you and the client should be figuring out if you are on the same page.  Once you have a contract, its hard to walk away and does your reputation little good.  We had this discussion here several years ago and I think TD chimed in about the time he walked away from a project, to no good effect and some regrets.

There is the element of having to make money and I doubt there is any gca alive (or dead) whose portfolio is/was perfectly consistent.  Most, if not all, of us just have to take different kinds of projects to keep the cash flowing.  It is part of being a professional designer.  Many non-designers get hung up on the idea perpetuated by a few (like Wright and RTJ) of the "master builder" who cannot be questioned, but that isn't how most designers work.

Now, I agree with Mike that I still strive to make the best 18 holes I can, given all that is going on.  But some projects just unfold differently for site or owner reasons.  If given a side hill site, like say Olympic, I would probably take the job and try to make it the best sidehill course in the county, state, country or world.  It still might not be among my best, but it would be my best side hill course! 

[JC Jones]

After your post, I understand now Jeff, thanks for your patience.

[Jud_T]

Jeff,

Thanks for your thoughts.  I know it's a difficult issue.  My relatives are architects, the housing kind, and are turning down work all the time in the name of art...I'm not sure it's helped them artistically, and definitely not financially....

[Tom_Doak]

JC:

I am just coming back from a very interesting job interview which I can't discuss now, but is VERY relevant to this thread ... you should ask this question again in six months.

I agree with the other architects who have spoken, that there is no shame in taking a "typical Florida" job or ANY job, if you want to do the work and if you are ready to apply yourself to it.  However, if you really don't agree with the client's take on what you should do, and you think it will have a negative impact on the quality of work you would do, then I would say you should pass and let that job go to an architect who wants it more or needs it more.

To the question of "brand protection", I am sick to death of it being phrased in such a way, but that concept has absolutely been part of my thinking from day one of my career.  You establish a reputation in this business pretty quickly, and it's hard to change that reputation afterward no matter what you do.  You shouldn't be accused of "selling out" because only you really understand your own philosophy and your own circumstances; but you shouldn't take jobs which will misrepresent your philosophy of golf, or it will affect your ability to follow your ideals down the road.

I remember when I worked for Pete Dye, he told me that Bill Diddel refused to do any jobs where the client wanted to put in fairway irrigation; he just thought it was the wrong thing to do.  Pete admired him for that and told him that he would do the same, and Mr. Diddel told him not to be an idiot ... times were changing, and Pete could not afford to take a similar stand.

[JC Jones]

JC:

I am just coming back from a very interesting job interview which I can't discuss now, but is VERY relevant to this thread ... you should ask this question again in six months.

I agree with the other architects who have spoken, that there is no shame in taking a "typical Florida" job or ANY job, if you want to do the work and if you are ready to apply yourself to it.  However, if you really don't agree with the client's take on what you should do, and you think it will have a negative impact on the quality of work you would do, then I would say you should pass and let that job go to an architect who wants it more or needs it more.

To the question of "brand protection", I am sick to death of it being phrased in such a way, but that concept has absolutely been part of my thinking from day one of my career.  You establish a reputation in this business pretty quickly, and it's hard to change that reputation afterward no matter what you do.  You shouldn't be accused of "selling out" because only you really understand your own philosophy and your own circumstances; but you shouldn't take jobs which will misrepresent your philosophy of golf, or it will affect your ability to follow your ideals down the road.

I remember when I worked for Pete Dye, he told me that Bill Diddel refused to do any jobs where the client wanted to put in fairway irrigation; he just thought it was the wrong thing to do.  Pete admired him for that and told him that he would do the same, and Mr. Diddel told him not to be an idiot ... times were changing, and Pete could not afford to take a similar stand.

This is brilliant, Tom, and explains so much of how you came to be where you are in your career today.  Thank you.